Excellent points.
Yes, the best “reform” that can be hoped for is that Muslims become so “nominal” in their adherance that they simply ignore the tenets of Islam, as Billy has pointed out that many in some Muslim countries do.
But religions are always prone to “revivals”, where believers attempt to return to the fundamentals of their faith and scriptures. In the case of Islam, that would mean a return to following the example of Mohammed, who, as you point out, was the epitome of barbaric.
3 Likes
Matthew 5:17 is one of the examples of a probably genuine quote from the preacher on whom the “Jesus Christ” figure was built. Scholars say this because it goes against the message of the gospelers. There are quite a few such passages in Matthew: eg.that Jesus has come for the lost of Israel, not for the gentiles; that he has come not for peace but to “send a sword”. The quoted statement that he came to fulfill the law does make nonsense of Paul’s idea that his sacrifice cancels the Law and creates a “new covenant”. The stark contradiction of the Paulist message is one of the indications that the authors of “Mark” and “Matthew” were not highly intelligent men.
On a different point: The monotheism of the Hebrews was a huge advance from the barbarity of human sacrifice. “God” makes it clear in Genesis that the seasons do not depend on the shedding of human blood. No throwing of babies into the furnace-maws of iron gods to ensure good weather and good crops. The myth of Abraham substituting, on Jehovah’s command, an animal instead of his son Isaac as a sacrifice, is the founding myth of Abrahamic monotheism. Judaism came long after Abraham. It dates from about 1250 BCE - the leadership of the Egyptian Prince Moses and the giving of the Law to the Hebrews. Yes, cruel and ridiculous tests and punishments are prescribed, but the idea was to establish a moral religion. The Law was and is the “Holy or Holies”. Alexander was surprised to find that behind the close doors of the Temple - as still behind the closed doors of every Jewish house of worship - there is nothing but the scrolls of the Law. It is inappropriate to speak of the “barbarity” of the “Old Testament”.
Human sacrifice was revived as a religious concept in Christianity. Just one human sacrifice: that of the “entirely human AND entirely divine” Jesus Christ.
Have you read the Book of Ecclesiastes? It is often called “the favorite bible book of atheists” because, though allusions to “God” are made, it is packed with very worldly wisdom. It is as far from being barbaric as the philosophy of Socrates, Plato, or Aristotle.
2 Likes
Additional information: The “first” covenant was made by “God” with Noah, that never again would he send a flood to destroy all life on earth. It was NOT the giving of the law nor his decree that Adam and Eve be punished by eternal toil and (according to St. Paul) the stain of ineradicable sin be inherited by all their descendants forever, from which mankind was redeemed by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. So, to speak of that “redemption” as a “new covenant” is an error committed by innumerable Christian exegetes, theologians, and believers. (But to look for consistency, logic, fact, in the “TRUTH” of Christianity - or any other religion - is to appeal to reason and so miss the point. Religion as such demands the suspension of reason.)
3 Likes
Yes, Judaism established a huge advance over the pagan practice of human sacrifice by replacing it with animal sacrifice. It established a moral religion, as you say, but some of the laws, such as stoning for adultery, were still barbaric.
2 Likes
Barbarous punishment under the most enlightened systems of law continues.
Here’s an example from 20th. century America.
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were traitors and deserved the death sentence.
But what of the manner of their execution?
From various sources on the internet:
Julius Rosenberg, the weaker of the two, went first. It took three shocks of 2,000 volts each to electrocute him.
Then Ethel Rosenberg. A wisp of smoke curled toward the ceiling as the current first charged through her. Four jolts swept through her and still she was not dead. A fifth was ordered.
She was removed from the electric chair after three charges, only for it to be discovered her heart was still beating, so, gruesomely, she had to be strapped back into it and was tortured with two more. There was international outrage at her death. “The most horrific story.” … “Her death was so barbaric …
2 Likes
The intent of electrocution as a means of execution is that it is to be more humane than those methods which preceded it: firing squad and hanging. While it has not always been as quick and as painless as intended, I think this is due more to the novelty of the method and the inexperience of the executioners rather than to willful cruelty.
Although it sometimes takes multiple shocks to stop the heart, if conducted correctly the initial jolt passing through the brain causes (or is at least intended to cause) immediate unconsciousness. Additional shocks, then, are not perceived by the condemned. While multiple shocks were required to stop Ethel Rosenberg’s heart, she almost certainly did not feel them. There are numerous cases where executions were botched, where the condemned was not rendered immediately unconscious. There is also some debate whether the method is truly painless even when performed correctly. But, the intent was always to carry out the penalty of death with minimal pain and suffering, even if this was not always (or perhaps never) achieved.
So, while the electric chair is certainly less than perfect, I don’t think it’s fair to call it barbarous unless one feels that any capital punishment is barbarous.
3 Likes
What I was mainly thinking about there was Leviticus. Surely from where we stand today, stoning adulterers to death etc is barbaric? The phrase “Old Testament Barbarity” does not imply that everything about the Old Testament is barbaric, only that barbarity is included within it.
I have not read the bible, I did try to start recently but I got discouraged right at the beginning by the very irrationality of it all, and I ended up deciding it was not worthwhile. I may try and dip into the Book of Ecclesiastes as you speak well of it, as I am very keen to gain wisdom from wherever I can!
3 Likes
It is as necessary for an educated person to have read the Bible as to have read Shakespeare and Dickens. Not any edition, but the King James Version. How can you understand subsequently written texts of English Literature - or for that matter European and world literature - chock-full of bible quotations and allusions, without knowing what the authors are talking about? You don’t need to read all of it, but at least Genesis, Exodus, Isaiah, Job, Ecclesiastes and the erotic Song of Songs . If you read Revelation in the “New Testament”, read Daniel in the “Old Testament”. If you read Mark and Matthew, read Isaiah and the Psalms and at least some of the prophets. Don’t read it as history. The myths are only myths. The story of the Exodus form Egypt is particularly absurd. But read the “OT” as poetry and both “OT” and “NT” as history-shaping, Europe-haunting fiction. If you have any feeling for poetry at all, you will get a lot of pleasure from the “OT” and one chapter of the “NT” - Corinthians i, 13 (ostensibly written by St. Paul, but obviously not actually, as Paul was a very bad writer, and that one chapter is by a poet). Some of the best poetry ever written is in the KJV.
4 Likes
That the chair was substituted for hanging on the grounds that it would be “more merciful” is well known. But have you ever experienced an electric shock? Even a mild one? How anyone could imagine that the electric chair is more merciful than a jump on a rope or a bullet to the heart or brain, is beyond my understanding.
It is impossible to know how much a person still feels who is beyond the power of communication.
I am all for the death penalty - as punishment as much as deterrent. And I’ve sometimes allowed myself to think, when I have been extra outraged, that a person who has tortured an innocent person to death ought to suffer the same means of execution. But reason has usually argued against that, after all.
2 Likes
Would you say that the Roman method of execution - crucifixion - was less barbaric than stoning?
Death by crucifixion can take days. At least stoning - which is terrible, yes! - is over in minutes.
3 Likes
I will read the bible one day if I feel inclined, but I do not aspire to be an “educated” person, I aspire to be a wise and knowledgeable person, and I see very little evidence of wisdom among the “educated” in general. It seems to me that the bible has done far more to confuse people and make them submissive than it has to make them wise, and so as our time on this earth is limited I will continue to seek wisdom elsewhere.
For all their education, the “educated” in general have utterly failed to foresee and warn us of the threat from the rise of the corporatist NWO and Islam. It has fallen to the likes of Tommy Robinson to wake up the public to that latter threat, and many vloggers and former comedians are now doing far more to raise awareness of the activities of the NWO than the “educated”. The “educated” by contrast generally have spent their time musing on obscure trivia while the decline of the West unfolded before our eyes.
2 Likes
Perhaps I should have said “a cultured person”.
Do you want to be only and merely a homo politicus?
It was you who started this whole thread by asking the question which heads the topic. But suddenly you aren’t interested at all in the question you raised? Whatever made you raise it?
1 Like
I am still very much interested in the answer to the question because in my mind it’s right at the heart of the debate about Islam. The West was yes shaped by Christianity and we can’t (unfortunately) disentangle ourselves entirely from the Christian influence. I fear that Christianity in the modern age is a sort of trojan horse which has in part weakened us and opened the gates as it were for Islam to come in.
Just as I don’t need to read the whole Koran and all the Hadiths to understand that Islam is a threat, likewise I don’t need to know every last thing that is written in the Bible to understand something about Christianity. I’m getting an ever clearer picture that nothing in Christianity is really clear, whereas Islam on the other hand is transparent and straightforward - the objective is to spread Islam by absolutely any means at all, including violence and deception. Nothing written in this debate so far has changed my conclusion at the end of the above post:
The conclusion I have come to is that it is simply not clear beyond doubt that the New Covenant overrides Old Testament barbarity, and so I believe the bible is very open to interpretation by the believers.
If we can’t say with certainty that Jesus’s message to his followers was that they should reject the harsh punishments called for in Leviticus, then for one thing we have a harder time convincing people that Islam isn’t just another religion that can also be reformed.
I am also alarmed to witness what seems to be a growing Christian revival among the right, as we discussed in the discussion about the Populist Delusion I think recently. This seems to me to need countering, as I don’t think it’s healthy and will probably create obstacles for a more general awakening of the public to the truth about the NWO takeover, because ordinary people will be put off from listening to the voices on the right. I have for example been witnessing with dismay the fact that James Delingpole has become quite religious and often spends quite a long time talking about religion to his guests. Although for now I still listen to most of the podcasts I am sure many more casual listeners will be put off.
2 Likes
The Enlightenment is the reform that made all the difference in the West.
There has been no equivalent in other histories.
3 Likes
Crucifixion was also barbaric. I’m not saying only laws such as stoning were barbaric - thats just one example. Alot of the laws of different cultures back then - including crucifixion - were.
Compared to modern civilization, ancient times and people were, in general, barbaric.
That’s one of the best arguments against “Holy Scripture” (of any religion) being from a “God” - because some of its laws are barbaric, reflecting the primitive times in which it was written, rather than the omnipotence of an eternal god.
As civilization evolved, laws evolved to reflect its advancements, such as the Hebrew shift from human sacrifice to animal sacrifice, and then the Christian shift from animal sacrifice to no need for any sacrifice (using the excuse of Jesus sacrificing himself - a barbaric concept in itself, but convenient).
Capitol punishment laws also evolved, from stoning and crucifixion, etc, to modern methods.
2 Likes
The adherence to Scriptures is highly selective in modern Christianity and different sects emphasize different parts. Even as early as the Seventh Century, the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches had both moved away from plain meaning to allegorical interpretation of Scripture. The Reformation accelerated this by fragmenting Christianity. In a real sense, Christians have gone from believing their religion to believing in their religion.
3 Likes
Welcome linuxhitman. Your comment is interesting.
There were many Christianities in the early centuries of our common era.
3 Likes
Thanks for your input linuxhitman. Do you share my view on Islam then or do you think it is reformable?
2 Likes
Dunno. All religions have a dose of fairies at the bottom of the garden but, it seems top me, Islam is demonstrably into dangerously wackadoodle territory.
OTOH, maybe Islam is in a transitional state analogous to the Reformation. I don’t think so but it may just be too early to tell. More likely, IMO, is that radical Muslims really believe their religion is big “T” Truth and internalize its principles. That is not remotely like the situation in Christianity since the late 19th Century.
3 Likes
Do you think that a 53 year old man who has sex with a 9 year old child is a paedophile?
2 Likes